Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

[f0rTyLeGz]

Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jah_yout</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nevertheless, Darwin confessed, &quot;To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, <span style="font-weight: bold">absurd in the highest degree</span>.&quot;</div></div>

I'm not sure why you posted this? It isn't like Charles Darwin understood <span style="font-style: italic">everything</span> about evolution. His insights were over a 150 years ago. But evolution isn't a <span style="font-style: italic">theory</span> in the common way of understanding that word. It is a fact. We evolved. Eyes evolved. Language evolved.

There were Pterosaurs link that lived right here on Earth for 150 MILLION years. They flew. They evolved, and changed. Human beings have been around for maybe 250 thousand years.

[jah_yout]

Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: f0rTyLeGz</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jah_yout</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nevertheless, Darwin confessed, &quot;To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, <span style="font-weight: bold">absurd in the highest degree</span>.&quot;</div></div>

I'm not sure why you posted this? It isn't like Charles Darwin understood <span style="font-style: italic">everything</span> about evolution. His insights were over a 150 years ago. But evolution isn't a <span style="font-style: italic">theory</span> in the common way of understanding that word. It is a fact. We evolved. Eyes evolved. Language evolved.

There were Pterosaurs link that lived right here on Earth for 150 MILLION years. They flew. They evolved, and changed. Human beings have been around for maybe 250 thousand years. </div></div>


not sure why i posted that? so darwin admitted that the function of the eyes is so complex that to explain it by way of natural selection is &quot;<span style="font-weight: bold">absurd in the highest degree</span>&quot; (<span style="font-weight: bold">his own words</span>) but we should over-ride his own assessment?
the god of natural selection??
who has proven that eyes just evolved, when even a simple camera requires a specific functional blueprint &amp; design...
if anything the scientific knowledge that has emerged over the last century since darwin discredits his theories more and more...he thought of the cell as a simple organism when in fact the cell is far more complex than the primitive equipment of that time could have imagined...
i'm always curious whenever someone states &quot;evolution is a fact&quot;...
what does this mean?
evolution is a broad word...do you mean that new species only form by old ones changing into newer forms? if we were fish why are there still fish?
why no half-human half-fish type creatures? was it that some fish decided to go on land and others decided to stay in the water?...certainly there would still be evolution going on &amp; e would be able to observe some creatures in the process of becoming another species...darwin's theory requires a leap of faith that rivals only that of religious creationists...
what makes evolution a 'fact'?
this word is thrown around so callously, but how can darwin's theory be a 'fact' when he does not know how life itself began?
there can be no species without life...
i suppose 'big bang theory' may be the compliment to darwin's version of &quot;origin of species&quot; but big-bang is still just a theory...

it seems to me the darwinists or evolutionists are every bit as much as close-minded &amp; dogmatic as the religionists or creationists are;
they wish to shut down the debate, declare darwinism as 'proven fact' and anyone who challenges darwin as ignorant superstitious beings...

there is a pattern there

[jah_yout]

Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

i'm sure darwinists will also give him a pass on this little passage;
do they also accept this as 'fact'?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------




<span style="font-size: 11pt">At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes … will no doubt be exterminated. <span style="font-weight: bold">The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla</span>. </span>

]Charles Darwin, &quot;The Descent of Man&quot;, 2nd edition, New York, A L. Burt Co., 1874, p. 178

[jah_yout]

Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: f0rTyLeGz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

There were Pterosaurs link that lived right here on Earth for 150 MILLION years. They flew. They evolved, and changed. Human beings have been around for maybe 250 thousand years. </div></div>





Because pterosaur anatomy has been so heavily modified for flight, and <span style="font-size: 14pt">immediate &quot;missing link&quot; predecessors have not so far been described, the ancestry of pterosaurs is not well understood</span>. Several <span style="font-weight: bold">hypotheses</span> have been advanced, including links to ornithodirans like Scleromochlus, an ancestry among the basal archosauriforms like Euparkeria, or among the prolacertiformes (which include gliding forms like Sharovipteryx).[18]
Two researchers, Chris Bennett (1996) and David Peters (2000), have found pterosaurs to be prolacertiformes or closely related to them. <span style="font-size: 14pt">Bennett only recovered pterosaurs as close relatives of the prolacertiformes after removing characteristics of the hind limb from his analysis, in an attempt to test the idea that these characters are the result of convergent evolution between pterosaurs and dinosaurs</span>. However, subsequent analysis by Dave Hone and Michael Benton (2007) <span style="font-weight: bold">could not reproduce this result</span>. Hone and Benton found pterosaurs to be closely related to dinosaurs even without hind limb characters. They also criticized previous studies by David Peters, raising &quot;serious questions&quot; about the methods he used to recover pterosaurs among the prolacertiformes. Hone and Benton concluded that although more primitive pterosauromorphs are needed to clarify their relationships, pterosaurs are best considered archosaurs, and specifically ornithodirans, given current evidence. In Hone and Benton's analysis, pterosaurs <span style="font-weight: bold">are either</span> the sister group of Scleromochlus or fall between it and Lagosuchus on the ornithodiran family tree.[37]


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


once you read the fine print you can find a lot of holes in these bytes

[DC]

Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">darwin's theory requires a leap of faith that rivals only that of religious creationists...</div></div>

oh-oh, now you've done it jahyout!

Good questions though. I only read partially, but you have raised some good questions taht have been brought up here in conversations past. I have also wondered on the loopholes in this theory myself.

As a believer, I am in the middle somewhere. I can believe in and respect the scientific process. Big bang theory? It was said&quot; God created the heaves and the earth&quot;. Who to tell he used the big bang event to create? Certain aspects of the evolution theory I can appreciate, but other aspects I do question. It has not fully answered the question of the origin of life, scientifically for me.

Re: absolute questions to the origin of life, science will provide answers based on scientific (physcial) fact, faith provide answers from the spiritual aspect. I have no problem looking at the possibility from both ends..Hence they do have christian evolutionsists. oxymoron, but , yes, there are those who believe in bible and evolution.

Faith/religion has its own set of questions, scientific theories do have its own set of questions.It is part of the process of us as human beings yearning to know the ultimate truth and answers to our existence.

<span style="font-style: italic">Wish i had more time to join in this conversation properly...but oonu carry on.</span>

[jah_yout]

Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

seen....


i would just say try to catch the movie if you can...it's also on youtube

my approach to this rant is not based on science or faith so to speak;

it's about objectively reasoning the thing out with an open mind;
or at least my idea of such...


<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/TZsND1RIoAQ&amp;feature=related"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/TZsND1RIoAQ&amp;feature=related" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

This misunderstanding is due to the generay belief that to be intelligent is to be smart.

As a long member of the mot popular organization of above normal IQ I can say we are not smarter than the average person.

What we do is to mimic nature in creating many variables of a solution and natural selection will choose the best result.

We can do that because we are able to think much faster han the average perso .
So we are able to think through many ideas and eliminate the ones that are not suitable.

That is why we seem to be the know-it-all.

We have thought ghrough so many problems in our lifetime that we tend to be familiar with a lot more ideas than the average person.

Having a reliable memory recollection system doesn't hurt either.

Nature does not create one perfect design or even many perfect designs in each species.

It creates variations, many variations.

These happen on a daily basis,but the most survivble variations survive to reproduce their design.


To those who are not aware of the whole picture it seem that only the design that survives was created.

But we can't blame them for their ignorance.

[jah_yout]

Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed



please explain to me how the first cell 'appeared' o non-ignorant one

[f0rTyLeGz]

Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jah_yout</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
once you read the fine print you can find a lot of holes in these bytes </div></div>
I think you miss my point maybe... I am not saying that we, or better scientists, know everything about pterosaurs. These beings lived millions of years ago... and for millions and millions of years. That is a long lang time rasta.

But anyway... evolution isn't in doubt. We humans evolved from earlier species. Evolution is not in the business of saying where was the first cell... and how did life come about.

The &quot;missing links&quot; issues aren't instances where evolution <span style="font-style: italic">could</span> be proved false. These aren't times where maybe God came in and did something... stirred the pot so to speak.

I am delighted that you read the article about pterosaurs... they are so amazing... and they endured for so long!

[f0rTyLeGz]

Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jah_yout</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i'm sure darwinists will also give him a pass on this little passage;
do they also accept this as 'fact'?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------
<span style="font-size: 11pt">At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes … will no doubt be exterminated. <span style="font-weight: bold">The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla</span>. </span>

]Charles Darwin, &quot;The Descent of Man&quot;, 2nd edition, New York, A L. Burt Co., 1874, p. 178 </div></div>
I don't get it really. Darwin isn't evolution. His writings are not the Bible of Evolution. Everything he said and believed does not have to be defended by science in order for science to &quot;win.&quot; Darwin was a man of his times, and no doubt had some issues like everyone else. Science is not interested in proving any religious system wrong.

[f0rTyLeGz]

Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jah_yout</div><div class="ubbcode-body">it seems to me the darwinists or evolutionists are every bit as much as close-minded &amp; dogmatic as the religionists or creationists are;
they wish to shut down the debate, declare darwinism as 'proven fact' and anyone who challenges darwin as ignorant superstitious beings...

there is a pattern there
</div></div>
Scientists really don't care if Creationists and religious groups don't believe their findings. It isn't an issue. It is those folks who ought to figure out some experiments to PROVE their findings are wrong. But just saying that &quot;scientists are close minded and dogmatic&quot; doesn't mean much. That's just an ad hominum argument. If you have some proof that evolution is false then prove it. Don't demand a half fish half man as a missing link, and say that disproves the &quot;theory.&quot;

Sure you will find scientists whose religious beliefs are in conflict with what &quot;science&quot; is discovering. Or scientists that are political or bombastic or rude about their findings.

There is a cursory article about the evolution of the eye at Wikipedia... you can find that here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye

[jah_yout]

Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: f0rTyLeGz</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jah_yout</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i'm sure darwinists will also give him a pass on this little passage;
do they also accept this as 'fact'?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------
<span style="font-size: 11pt">At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes … will no doubt be exterminated. <span style="font-weight: bold">The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla</span>. </span>

]Charles Darwin, &quot;The Descent of Man&quot;, 2nd edition, New York, A L. Burt Co., 1874, p. 178 </div></div>
I don't get it really. Darwin isn't evolution. His writings are not the Bible of Evolution. Everything he said and believed does not have to be defended by science in order for science to &quot;win.&quot; Darwin was a man of his times, and no doubt had some issues like everyone else. Science is not interested in proving any religious system wrong. </div></div>


so some of his theories are allowed to be incorrect because of the times he lived in?

why does it have to be about &quot;religious systems&quot;?
it should be about uncovering the truth...bias and dismissal of unknown entities is not the best way to get to the truth...focusing on attacking religion does not in itself address some of the fundamental biological problems posed by chance occurrence of life/ species diversity...
my feeling is that random chance theory of life &amp; evolution proponents are not interested in any logical or scientific argument which casts doubt on their theories...they merely dismiss it as 'religion'...even when it is clearly not

[jah_yout]

Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: f0rTyLeGz</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jah_yout</div><div class="ubbcode-body">it seems to me the darwinists or evolutionists are every bit as much as close-minded &amp; dogmatic as the religionists or creationists are;
they wish to shut down the debate, declare darwinism as 'proven fact' and anyone who challenges darwin as ignorant superstitious beings...

there is a pattern there
</div></div>
Scientists really don't care if Creationists and religious groups don't believe their findings. It isn't an issue. It is those folks who ought to figure out some experiments to PROVE their findings are wrong. But just saying that &quot;scientists are close minded and dogmatic&quot; doesn't mean much. That's just an ad hominum argument. If you have some proof that evolution is false then prove it. Don't demand a half fish half man as a missing link, and say that disproves the &quot;theory.&quot;

Sure you will find scientists whose religious beliefs are in conflict with what &quot;science&quot; is discovering. Or scientists that are political or bombastic or rude about their findings.

There is a cursory article about the evolution of the eye at Wikipedia... you can find that here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye </div></div>

i must admit i have a few questions....

the smallest unit of life is the cell;
incidentally a cell's structure &amp; functions is extremely complex...
until someone can explain how the first cell appeared or produce a living cell from non-living entities,
how can they say with any certainty how life began &amp; developed?

if we were once fish...
why do we drown?
why did we not keep gills since we developed from simpler forms into more complex forms..
.why did we not keep wings?
has evolution stopped?
or are we becoming newer species...
if it has stopped, why?
and has it stopped also in the numerous animal species on earth...
what exactly was the creature which was the ancestor of human &amp; chimp that we broke off from &amp; when did it live?
when did we break off and why did we choose to become advanced while our brother apes chose to stay more primitive/ inferior;


i know- too many questions

[f0rTyLeGz]

Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jah_yout</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: f0rTyLeGz</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jah_yout</div><div class="ubbcode-body">it seems to me the darwinists or evolutionists are every bit as much as close-minded &amp; dogmatic as the religionists or creationists are;
they wish to shut down the debate, declare darwinism as 'proven fact' and anyone who challenges darwin as ignorant superstitious beings...

there is a pattern there
</div></div>
Scientists really don't care if Creationists and religious groups don't believe their findings. It isn't an issue. It is those folks who ought to figure out some experiments to PROVE their findings are wrong. But just saying that &quot;scientists are close minded and dogmatic&quot; doesn't mean much. That's just an ad hominum argument. If you have some proof that evolution is false then prove it. Don't demand a half fish half man as a missing link, and say that disproves the &quot;theory.&quot;

Sure you will find scientists whose religious beliefs are in conflict with what &quot;science&quot; is discovering. Or scientists that are political or bombastic or rude about their findings.

There is a cursory article about the evolution of the eye at Wikipedia... you can find that here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye </div></div>

i must admit i have a few questions....

the smallest unit of life is the cell;
incidentally a cell's structure &amp; functions is extremely complex...
until someone can explain how the first cell appeared or produce a living cell from non-living entities,
how can they say with any certainty how life began &amp; developed?

if we were once fish...
why do we drown?
why did we not keep gills since we developed from simpler forms into more complex forms..
.why did we not keep wings?
has evolution stopped?
or are we becoming newer species...
if it has stopped, why?
and has it stopped also in the numerous animal species on earth...
what exactly was the creature which was the ancestor of human &amp; chimp that we broke off from &amp; when did it live?
when did we break off and why did we choose to become advanced while our brother apes chose to stay more primitive/ inferior;

i know- too many questions </div></div>
It's not really that &quot;we&quot; were once fish. It is that billions of years ago cellular evolution began. It is hard to imagine... to grasp, how many years this <span style="font-style: italic">evolving</span> has been going on. But we measure time from 2000 years ago. There was a 20,000 years ago... a 200,000 years ago, a 2 million years ago, 20 million, 200 million and ten times 200 million years ago. If our species human beings were on a 24 hour clock with the history of life on the planet, we would have existed for less than a minute. Things move slowwww. The era of protozoa was 1.5 BILLION years ago.

There is no choice in evolution. It is more like... say ten percent of the young people get hung up on playing a certain computer game when they are children, and then 20 years later people that learned that game when they were kids are much better skilled at a computer program that needs employees and get top jobs because of it. They get top jobs and make 50 times more money than the rest of the population. Because of that all of their families do much much better because circumstances turned grim just at this time.

Evolution doesn't concern itself with how life started. But basically, wherever the conditions for life exist, that is where you will find life... here is what Harvard's Andy Knoll says about the origins of cellular life in an interview...

<span style="font-weight: bold">In a nutshell, what is the process? How does life form?</span>

Mr. Knoll answers, &quot;The short answer is we don't really know how life originated on this planet. There have been a variety of experiments that tell us some possible roads, but we remain in substantial ignorance. That said, I think what we're looking for is some kind of molecule that is simple enough that itcan be made by physical processes on the young Earth, yet complicated enough that it can take charge of making more of itself. That, I think, is the moment when we cross that great divide and start moving toward something that most people would recognize as living.&quot;

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/how-did-life-begin.html

Sure species are still evolving... like I said earlier it is over time so it is hard to see. But some things evolve much more quickly like viruses ... or fruit flies. You can also see how evolution works in things like languages or technology. It works the same way basically... that is, what works survives, and what doesn't disappears.

[Diplomat]

Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Natral</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dr.Dudd</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You need This catch up on your reading.
The So called Darwin's theory was not even invented or discovered by Darwin
It is nit even a theory But a scientific principle discovered to be essential to the continued existence of all forms of life.
</div></div>
Agree with you on this,the evolution of the species,including mankind,is scientifically proven,but it is not in the interest of religion to pursue this line so they will do everything to supress and ridicule it,because it makes a mockery of the line put forth by christianity,that &quot;god&quot; made us. </div></div>
Can't believe you said that. Between both extremes are the thiestic evolutionists (primarily scientists of all stripes) who advocate that belief in God and acceptance of evolution are not mutually exclusive. Personally, I think the continued pitting of one against the other is nonsensical. Given that the creation story is not a blow-by-blow scientific description of how man was created, who is to say that God couldn't use the mechanism of evolution to accomplish His purpose? It's not like millions of years mean anything to Him or that He was in a hurry. Evolution answers some questions that religion doesn't in the same way religion answers some questions that evolution can't. Fundamentalists on both sides need to chill. Time to move on...